I think there is but I don’t know what it would be. As I indicated earlier, it’s the level that would put someone outside of normal human intelligence. Whatever that is - I’m not an IQ expert.
Point is that no one is making such ridiculous claims, at least not in the discussions that take place here.
You just did, apparently.
No, but saying that someone (or some group) is inherently, due to genetics, less intelligent on average is pretty much the same as saying that they are inferior in intelligence (on average).
Either you’re confused or playing some sort of game. Either way …
DT’s post was hardly pointless bashing. I don’t think he should have been modded for what was a pretty mild statement
Do you believe that “anti-abortionists want to kill women with clubs” is a pretty mild statement?
Regards,
Shodan
I think I missed where Der Trihs said that, could you provide a link?
[quote=“Shodan, post:109, topic:673697”]
Does anyone see any difference between the following -
[ul][li]Here is a cite showing that, when you correct for SES and parental education levels, group X tends to score somewhat lower on SAT tests. Is it possible that part of this might be due to genetic differences?[/li][li]The great majority of US citizens kill brown people for fun[/li][li]Anti-abortionists want to kill women with clubs.[/ul][/li][/QUOTE]
There is, of course, the difference you’re getting at, and I agree it’s real and it’s important on a discussion board.
Another difference, however, is that in our culture, only the first statement has been used as part of a serious and long-term effort to deny rights to a large group of people. It’s got a historical resonance and malice that the second and third statements lack.
Still another difference is that the first two attack people for accidents of birth, while the third one attacks people for their choices.
I frankly think all three statements lead to poor debates, and I have no problem with modding all three statements. I think Der Trihs’s hyperbole and doubling-down on hyperbole are anti-intellectual twaddle. But I don’t think they’re the only anti-intellectual twaddle on the board.
It’s more confusing than anything else: what do anti-abortionists have against women with clubs?
The women are bogarting all the clubs and the anti-abortionists don’t have enough to go seal clubbing with.
Exactly this.
It was already provided. Maybe you could read the thread.
Regards,
Shodan
No. Saying that blacks are genetically less intelligent is not the same as saying they are genetically subhuman. “Subhuman” is a word with a definition and that definition is not congruent with “lower than average intelligence.” Indeed, the calculation of average intelligence must include those who are lower than average, which must include blacks (given the truth of the assertion, which I only do for the sake of this particular point) which means they are by definition human.
You see, I agree with you that positions that support racial genetic anything are silly, stupid, generally hateful, and just incorrect. But proving that is not enough for you, you have to launch into over-the-top hyperbole which does not do your side of any argument any favors. It just makes it look ridiculous and actually gives credence to the carefully worded nonsense on the other side just because it is carefully worded.
So you see it is not the subject, at least not in this particular case, that is mod-worthy, it is your particular style. The only other people I can think of who engage in this kind of rhetorical overkill are usually banned within a few weeks.
I don’t expect to convince you of anything, of course. Your self-righteous indignation is shield against any amount of persuasion even from those who are generally on your side in most issues.
Roddy
Well, I’m not going to do the investigative work here to make your point for you, so I’ll just file this as a ‘no’.
If the burden of actually reading a thread is too much, I suspect reposting the same information will likewise overwhelm you. So it appears we are at an impasse.
So file it however you like.
Regards,
Shodan
Try me!
Apparently Der Trihs said that opposing abortion and contraception is about persecuting women, and that since in this country these men cannot beat women with clubs they do this instead. I think his remarks are pretty much right-on, and also that this is not the equivalent of saying that anti-abortionists want to kill women with clubs. Apparently Shodan does not agree with me. I think maybe if someone else other than Der Trihs had made the statement it might not have been interpreted in this way. I think reputation is a bitch.
Odd. That wasn’t in DT’s post. I wonder why you chose to bring in something irrelevant to the discussion, as if to prejudice a reader who didn’t go back to check? Sure, I’ll answer your question but in another thread.
As for this one, I stand by my belief that DT should not have been modded for the post in question.
Agreed. There is absolutely nothing in the quoted post that warrants a warning, not even an admonishment, and I suggest that had the same sentiment, using the same words, been posted by a different member no warning would have been meted.
As far as I am aware, a member’s body of work, specifically works that were not previously warned or deemed cause(s) for suspension, without regard to how well those works were received, don’t (or should not) color whether or not subsequent posts are warned.
It certainly seems to me that the lens of scrutiny is being more finely focused on Der Trihs lately. It is almost as though there is a ‘building of a case’ to justify a future banning going on. Of course, I could be completely wrong, but I am disturbed by what I am seeing lately, the warning of the post above being a case in point and, I suspect, not the only one.
Thanks for not making me wade through the past ~130 posts; and I agree, this doesn’t sound at all like what Shodan claimed.